- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How do you protect Battleships in the modern era? Trump building 25
Posted on 12/23/25 at 9:30 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 12/23/25 at 9:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Battleships don't have the same upside and all the same downside.
I think battleship is confusing here but thats typical for Trump. It will have one railgun and smaller 5" guns which similar to the Arleigh Burke class or cruisers.
The rest is missiles, some hypersonic some cruise.
Its going to be yuge, because Donny likes things that way.
LINK
quote:
Other armaments would include a rail gun, five-inch conventional guns, and a range of lasers and smaller guns.
quote:
The battleships will be armed with new nuclear-capable cruise missiles to be launched from 12 cells on board. The missiles would be hypersonic – more than five times the speed of sound – and maneuverable to confuse enemy defenses.
The Trump class would also feature 128 vertical launch cells that can be used for slower-flying Tomahawk cruise missiles, anti-ship missiles, or missile defense interceptors.
This post was edited on 12/23/25 at 9:31 am
0
Posted on 12/23/25 at 9:50 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
I thought the Navy had given up on the railgun concept 4 years ago.
Posted on 12/24/25 at 8:47 pm to ItTakesAThief
They are just drone bait now
Posted on 12/24/25 at 9:27 pm to ItTakesAThief
It’s about reinvesting in America. The money is irrelevant since it’s going back into American business and creating jobs.
Posted on 12/24/25 at 10:54 pm to ItTakesAThief
You make them invisible using advanced technology.
Posted on 12/25/25 at 7:09 am to Shamoan
Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman along with several other big players spend 10’s of millions in defense lobbying/funding PACs to key committee members, and ExxonMobil, Chevron, & Shell are major donors (more so to the Republican party) who do the same.
The sudden need for battleships and the recent extension (to 2031) of carbon capture welfare (climate change porn) is most likely just a coincidence, one that the shareholders of these companies will love. I wonder if even the announcement of these things also triggered some key changes in the portfolio investment strategies of our esteemed congressmen.
I for one will be celebrating these developments as I am being fleeced this coming tax season.
The sudden need for battleships and the recent extension (to 2031) of carbon capture welfare (climate change porn) is most likely just a coincidence, one that the shareholders of these companies will love. I wonder if even the announcement of these things also triggered some key changes in the portfolio investment strategies of our esteemed congressmen.
I for one will be celebrating these developments as I am being fleeced this coming tax season.
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News